RLJ v Direct-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2022] QCAT 137

Date: 21 April 2022
Court/Tribunal: Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Judicial Officer/Tribunal Member: Member Goodman
Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) Sections: ss 13, 26, 31, 34, 58
Rights Considered: Right to protect families and children; Right to a fair hearing; Right not to be tried or punished more than once; Other Legislation: Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) ss 19, 20, 66; Working with Children (Risk Management and Screening Act) 2000 (Qld) ss 6, 221, 226, 360, sch 2, sch 4.
Keywords: Blue Card

This case concerned an application for review of the respondent’s decision to issue a negative blue card notice to the applicant, RLJ. In ordering that the respondent’s decision be set aside, the Tribunal noted that the applicant’s rights to a fair hearing (section 31) and not to be tried or punished more than once (section 34) as well as the right to protect families and children (section 26) were relevant, but did not substantively discuss these rights.

The applicant had been issued a negative blue card notice on the basis that the applicant’s circumstances amounted to an exceptional case where the issuing of a positive notice would not be in the best interests of children: at [3]–[4]. The applicant had a history of drug use, with three drug-related offences between 2014 and 2018: at [2]. She had two additional offences preceding these drug offences, including a public nuisance offence and a common assault offence both in 2009: at [2].

The Tribunal set aside the respondent’s decision, finding that the applicant’s case was not an exceptional case where it would not be in the best interests of children to deny a blue card.

The Tribunal noted that the Human Rights Act 2019 (Qld) placed it under an obligation to give proper consideration to any relevant human rights in making its decision, and noted that the applicant’s rights to a fair hearing (section 31) and not to be tried or punished more than once (section 34), as well as the right to protect families and children (section 26), were relevant. The Tribunal concluded that its decision was compatible with human rights: at [23].

Visit the judgment: RLJ v Direct-General, Department of Justice and Attorney-General [2022] QCAT 137